libc question

[David Brown]

On 7/31/06, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 07:01:35PM -0700, David Brown wrote:
> > Is there any particular reason for this? security? sake of standardization?
>
> Performance, and internal consistency, among other reasons.

Is there any other mailing list conversation about this?

I've googled for a week (on and off) trying to find information about
doing this and the only things I've found were from 1998 on the
libc-hackers ml that's been shutdown. From the conversation there,
some of the other reasons were userspace code using the __libc_open
and __open directly in their code.  I'm curious to see any
conversation on the performance of glibc using internal __open vs.
using open directly.

Is there any conversation about this out there?

- David Brown